DFAW vs. VT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

DFAW (Dimensional World Equity ETF) and VT (Vanguard Total World Stock ETF) are both Global Equities funds. DFAW is actively managed, while VT is passively managed. Over the past year, DFAW returned 26.81% vs 25.71% for VT. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. DFAW charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.06%/yr for VT.

Performance

DFAW vs. VT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional World Equity ETF (DFAW) and Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFAW achieves a 10.74% return, which is significantly higher than VT's 10.06% return.

DFAW

• 1D: -1.93%
• 1M: -0.34%
• YTD: 10.74%
• 6M: 9.89%
• 1Y: 26.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

VT

• 1D: -2.05%
• 1M: -0.44%
• YTD: 10.06%
• 6M: 9.32%
• 1Y: 25.71%
• 3Y*: 19.92%
• 5Y*: 10.51%
• 10Y*: 12.96%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DFAW vs. VT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DFAW Dimensional World Equity ETF	10.74%	20.62%	15.49%	11.44%
VT Vanguard Total World Stock ETF	10.06%	22.43%	16.49%	11.75%

Correlation

The correlation between DFAW and VT is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	0.97

The correlation between DFAW and VT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

DFAW vs. VT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DFAW	VT
Technology	27.0%	31.1%
Financial Services	14.8%	15.2%
Industrials	13.4%	11.4%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	9.3%
Healthcare	8.0%	7.9%
Communication Services	7.0%	8.0%
Energy	5.5%	3.8%
Basic Materials	5.0%	4.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.8%	4.5%
Real Estate	2.3%	2.3%
Utilities	2.2%	2.4%

Return for Risk

DFAW vs. VT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

DFAW

DFAW Risk / Return Rank: 67
DFAW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
DFAW Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
DFAW Omega Ratio Rank: 67
DFAW Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
DFAW Martin Ratio Rank: 73

VT

VT Risk / Return Rank: 59
VT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
VT Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
VT Omega Ratio Rank: 58
VT Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
VT Martin Ratio Rank: 66

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

DFAW vs. VT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional World Equity ETF (DFAW) and Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	DFAW	VT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.11	1.91	+0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.88	2.62	+0.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.35	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.03	2.67	+0.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.17	11.57	+1.60

DFAW vs. VT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFAW Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is comparable to the VT Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFAW and VT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

DFAW vs. VT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFAW drawdown since its inception was -16.93%, smaller than the maximum VT drawdown of -50.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFAW and VT.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFAW	VT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.93%	-50.27%	+33.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.88%	-9.67%	+0.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.51%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.38%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.24%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.47%	-2.80%	+0.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.70%	-7.00%	+5.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	2.23%	-0.19%

Volatility

DFAW vs. VT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Dimensional World Equity ETF (DFAW) is 5.21%, while Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT) has a volatility of 5.65%. This indicates that DFAW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFAW	VT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.21%	5.65%	-0.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.45%	11.32%	-0.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.82%	13.58%	-0.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.61%	16.19%	-1.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.61%	17.20%	-2.59%

DFAW vs. VT - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFAW has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than VT's 0.06% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

DFAW vs. VT - Dividend Comparison

DFAW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.57%, less than VT's 1.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DFAW Dimensional World Equity ETF	1.57%	1.71%	1.47%	0.42%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VT Vanguard Total World Stock ETF	1.61%	1.82%	1.95%	2.08%	2.20%	1.82%	1.66%	2.32%	2.53%	2.11%	2.39%	2.45%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFAW and VT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, DFAW and VT move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, DFAW or VT?

VT has higher volatility (5.65%) compared to DFAW (5.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFAW dropped -16.93% vs VT's -50.27%.

Which ETF is better, DFAW or VT?

On 1-year performance, DFAW leads with 26.81% vs 25.71% for VT. On fees, VT is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, DFAW has been the lower-risk option at 5.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFAW or VT?

Over the 1-year period, DFAW has performed better with a 26.81% return vs 25.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFAW or VT?

VT is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for DFAW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DFAW or VT?

VT has the higher dividend yield at 1.61%, compared with 1.57% for DFAW.

What is the main difference between DFAW and VT?

They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for DFAW and 0.06% for VT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DFAW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.91), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.